Over at the CATO Institute, there is an excellent discussion of a topic that often divides libertarians as much as it does anyone else: children, their safety, and liberty. It looks interesting.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Thinking about children, their safety and libertyFebruary 26th, 2013 |
 2 comments to Thinking about children, their safety and liberty |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
“It is not an overreach to call the police if you see a child alone in a locked car; on the contrary, you should certainly do it”
I can only presume Anthony Green has a good dentist.
It’s interesting to me that Mr. Green doesn’t seem to differential at all between promoting an understanding among parents about a genuine hazard they might not have fully appreciated (such as the vulnerability of children in motor-vehicle accidents) and invoking state power to punish parents who haven’t done anything even remotely wrong (such as charging a parent with an offense for letting their child walk home from the library). It’s all “child safety efforts” to him, apparently. His essay is a perfect example of the kind of muddled thinking and rhetorical obfuscation that the original essay criticizes.